Bold statements. The next generation of consoles aren't even here yet and people are already claiming winners. Personally, I wouldn't be surprised if Nintendo ends up on top. They're the only one thinking outside of the box and it just might give them the edge over Sony and MS.

Thinking outside the box is one thing, they are thinking outside all of geometrey with that remote, I mean controller.

Although that article is mostly a joke, the one thing that was legitimate and could be true is the X360's inability to play that certain type of disc (BlueRay?). That's got me worried, also the first one out usually has troubles in the long run.

If you are a wealthy VG enthusiast, the PS3 looks great. Only problem, not everybody (myself included) can afford a state of the art $600 peice of equipment which only shows its true value on state of the art TV's.

Right now the next Gen does not look that great to me. Although, none of these systems have been released._________________"I never sleep, cause sleep is the cousin of death."

I wouldn't be too worried about BlueRay. HD-DVD seems to be the next step in formatting. After that though then I'd say BlueRay. But this won't happen for a couple years. Besides, MS has already said that they plan to support HD-DVD by releasing an upgrade for the X360 if things turn out like this.

If anything, BlueRay could be the single thing that kills the PS3. It'll have nothing to do with the Cell. I think going with BlueRay was a bad move. Should've just went with HD-DVD._________________

Joined: 22 Sep 2005Posts: 1392Location: In your imagination......yup, you are having visions of me.

Posted: Tue Nov 08, 2005 7:38 pm Post subject:

sabotage wrote:

Bold statements. The next generation of consoles aren't even here yet and people are already claiming winners. Personally, I wouldn't be surprised if Nintendo ends up on top. They're the only one thinking outside of the box and it just might give them the edge over Sony and MS.

Not only that, but the Rev is shaping up like a console that you might want to have even if you own one of the other two, while neither the 360 nor the PS3 will be worth if you own one of them. (Since it's totally different and all)

sabotage wrote:

I don't either to be honest. I know a little bit about it but it'd probably be wise to ask Ninja of Chaos. He's very wise in the technology/hardware category.

I might know a little about hardware, but i have no crystal ball yet. I know that Blue-Ray has almost the whole movie industry behind them, but i doubt consumers will like the idea of not being able to burn anything.

Specs wise, the Blue-Ray can hold much more space, but if you get 1X BD player, that's not too hot on reading speeds.....

Joined: 22 Sep 2005Posts: 1392Location: In your imagination......yup, you are having visions of me.

Posted: Tue Nov 08, 2005 8:50 pm Post subject:

Ninjilla wrote:

80 seconds! my god thats alot. Games on the PS2 now are what, like 2-6 seconds? Keep it like that Sony!

Slow down there!!

IF they are not compressed. I cannot see an idiot on the face of this earth that would leave their data non-compressed.

But with compression it will be around 15 seconds give or take, (Still one heck of alot) and might go down or up depending on what is being loaded. Also, this will use CPU power. It's not like the 360 that has special "power" left for decompression.